Tales from the Dawn

[SentioftheHoukai]

Listen, Lurina, if my personal belief in a hypothetical about human behavior that hasn't come to pass yet, but I think probably will, isn't enough to warrant the unilateral eradication of an entire race of people, then what is, huh?

The proper, moral answer would be NOTHING of course. Nothing truly justifies the act of killing, this is merely a facade we humans have crafted to give ourselves a convenient lie from which to hide behind when we want someone or something gone.

With all due respect, I’m going to say we should drop this direction for the topic right now. It is unhelpful and given the current real life connections it does nothing but raise the conversations temperature. Lets not do this.

I'm going to take a wild guess that I'm sure is probably correct but I think what Eara objects to being discussed is that of abortion. Which is a VERY touchy subject and should probably not be talked about here. A forum about a game let alone this section or this thread.

While I do concur with y'all that Veloran should perhaps have not brought that topic in particular up, and personally wish he did not, I yet still feel the following needs to be said. That subject matter is a hot potato for America in particular right now, however this forum has posters from the UK and other places in which it's not so tenuous an issue at the moment due to recent events. This isn't to diminish it's value, however despite its status as a hegemony the US nor the people who live in it's opinions aren't particularly more valued than those who live outside of it.

Why? Cleretic wanted us to "chew the fat" on the type of moral arguments implied here. This is one such associated argument. Why is it off limits? You and others here routinely go directly to very controversial lines of argumentation, and yet when it touches a little too closely to your personal beliefs, it's off limits? His line of inquiry is valid and fitting.

After all, as Lauront asserted here it hasn't stopped the forums before so why should it now? I believe one of the recent prevailing themes defending Venat's actions and views was to compare them to real-life women and their societal expectations, despite she herself nor the narrative suggesting no such thing was occurring either openly or behind the scenes. I believe in particular thoughts of "being a profound thinker who was ignored by those seeking to discredit her and misunderstood by society a la Hermes" and "being asked when she plans to retire and have and/or raise a few children, despite having no such expectations of herself" were but a few of the idealogues raised not more than two weeks ago in her defense. I find these assertations inaccurate and not so easily applied, however I possess no intention of attempting through either force or coercion to have others see such the way I myself see such.

Regardless, I feel Veloran's main motive in bringing it up is to assist in addressing the inherent hypocrisy in the stance Cleretic has chosen to take in regards to Venat and the actions she took. As well as the meaning behind them, and what they entail for those most affected by them.

Something I might be reading too much into is that between this story and the dialogue in-game of Endwalker and Pandemonium, there is the impression that the Ancients don't appear to have a lot of experience with strong emotions. They're almost like Star Trek Vulcans: they try to maintain and present a rational, logical front that focuses on careful reasoning and calm discussion, but when they start feeling emotions too strong to be reasoned away, they go all the way to the point of obsession and excess. Elpis-era Lahabrea even tried to rip out that emotional part of himself to maintain his rational side, which seems like overkill for a situation that would probably be solvable through talking it out and perhaps therapy (whether professional or just confiding in others). The archivist here feels fierce loyalty and common mindset to Venat, and appears to be unfamiliar with this feeling.

A lot of you give off the feeling of having never gone to therapy, and not possessing an inkling of what those kindly men and women are truly like and it shows. There is quite literally no simple and easy catch-all solution for trauma, and Lahabrea was in for all signs a rather traumatic and abusive relationship indeed. Not all people cope the same, some compartmentalize. Do you people make wild gesticulations on how a given person's interpersonal relations should be handled often, perchance?

Yes, we know you have chosen not to be convinced by anything, as you have stated yourself.

Except, when Lauront tries to agree to disagree he gets accused of lying or being disingenuous or trying to stir the pot and provoke yet more drama. What do YOU suggest he do, simply not air his views and opinions at all? There's only so far you can push a person afore they snap and stop caring about being consistently polite. People seem to have this awful habit of creating tumours, then complaining about them.